> The government choosing not to engage in or endorse certain speech does not suppress others engaging in that speech.

The second sentence is not related to what I'm saying. I'm responding to the notion that government resources can't be censored.

> What is your argument here?

There is no argument, but an observation: government resources can be censored. I'm not going to insult you by copying a definition of "censor" and explaining how it is possible to apply that action to government documents. You're smart enough to figure that out on your own.